Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33623692›Full record

ArticleClinical kidney journal2021

Survival on four compared with three times per week haemodialysis in high ultrafiltration patients: an observational study.

James Fotheringham, Nicholas Latimer, Marc Froissart, Florian Kronenberg, Peter Stenvinkel, Jürgen Floege, Kai-Uwe Eckardt, David C Wheeler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Stopping Versus Continuing Metformin in Patients With Advanced CKD: A Nationwide Scottish Target Trial Emulation Study.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2025 · on this map
    Observational
  5. Article
  6. Patient Preferences for Longer or More Frequent In-Center Hemodialysis Regimens: A Multicenter Discrete Choice Study.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

James FotheringhamSheffield Kidney Institute, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8980-2223
Nicholas LatimerSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Marc FroissartClinical Trial Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Florian KronenbergInstitute of Genetic Epidemiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Peter StenvinkelDepartment of Renal Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jürgen FloegeDepartment of Nephrology, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Aachen, Germany.
Kai-Uwe EckardtDepartment of Nephrology and Medical Intensive Care, Charité-Universitätsmedizin-Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
David C WheelerDepartment of Renal Medicine, University College London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe harm caused by the long interdialytic interval in three-times-per-week haemodialysis regimens (3×WHD) may relate to fluid accumulation and associated high ultrafiltration rate (UFR). Four-times-per-week haemodialysis (4×WHD) may offer a solution, but its impact on mortality, hospitalization and vascular access complications is unknown.

methodsFrom the AROii cohort of incident in-centre haemodialysis patients, 3×WHD patients with a UFR >10 mL/kg/h were identified. The hazard for the outcomes of mortality, hospitalization and vascular access complications in those who switched to 4×WHD compared with staying on 3×WHD was estimated using a marginal structural Cox proportional hazards model. Adjustment included baseline patient and treatment characteristics with inverse probability weighting used to adjust for time-varying UFR and cardiovascular comorbidities.

resultsFrom 10 637 European 3×WHD patients, 3842 (36%) exceeded a UFR >10 mL/kg/h. Of these, 288 (7.5%) started 4×WHD and at baseline were more comorbid. Event rates while receiving 4×WHD compared with 3×WHD were 12.6 compared with 10.8 per 100 patient years for mortality, 0.96 compared with 0.65 per year for hospitalization and 14.7 compared with 8.0 per 100 patient years for vascular access complications. Compared with 3×WHD, the unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for mortality on 4×WHD was 1.05 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.42]. Following adjustment for baseline demographics, time-varying treatment probability and censoring risks, this HR was 0.73 (95% CI 0.50-1.05; P = 0.095). Despite these adjustments on 4×WHD, the HR for hospitalization remained elevated and vascular access complications were similar to 3×WHD.

conclusionsThis observational study was not able to demonstrate a mortality benefit in patients switched to 4×WHD. To demonstrate the true benefits of 4×WHD requires a large, well-designed clinical trial. Our data may help in the design of such a study.

Indexed as

four-times-per-week haemodialysishospitalizationsurvival analysisultrafiltrationvascular access

Identifiers

PMID33623692
PMCPMC7886573

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.